More global warming contradictions

By letter to the editor

One thing Mr. Dunn ("Resisting Global Warming Panic") should point out that the GW scare mongers have consistently glossed over and I think is a deliberate omission. There are claims that the Medieval Optimum was not as warm as today in denial of the obvious plant distribution he pointed out, hence they claim doom. The second item of great importance that they don't tell anyone is the ocean levels during the Medieval Optimum were around 18 inches higher than they were today. During the following Little Ice Age, the ocean levels were about 18 inches lower than they were today. In all, a 36 inch swing in ocean levels from 1270 to the 1475.

During the Ice Age itself 12,000 years ago, the ocean levels were approximately 450 feet lower than they were today. One can intuitively say that for each average Global Temperature there is a corresponding Ocean level. Thus it stands to reason that the recent revision in the IPCC report to a17 inch (from the earlier 36 inch) ocean rise by 2100 is more in line with historical records, and that's only if the average Global Temperature increases toward the Medieval Optimum. This fact more than any other refutes the notion that Climate Change is man made.

Here is the challenge to everyone who proclaims Climate Change is Man's fault: explain what brought on the Medieval Optimum and the corresponding ocean level. Their feet should be held to the fire at every opportunity, maybe instead of holding their feet to fire they should be water boarded.

Here's an ominous inconvenient fact that our GW doom sayers have completely omitted: Ocean levels have actually dropped not risen in the Artic, Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. (You will need a subscription to view the referenced studies and articles)

Dan Scott